I recently read a pretty good book that nonetheless kind of peeved me by the end. It's called Napoleon's Buttons and it's non-fiction, a blend of science and history--how history has been shaped by chemistry, like the search for certain spices opening up world exploration, how plastics changed the economy, etc.. I like that sort of thing, and it's really pretty good. The conceit of the title is the idea that the tin buttons of Napoleon's soldiers' uniforms might have crumbled away in the cold Russian winter, contributing to the massive failure of that invasion. They mention this in the introduction--with lots of qualifiers and maybes and perhapses--and then they never talk about it again!

This book sounds fabulous (despite the button issue) and I thank you very much for sharing your peeve!

Have you read any of Jared Diamond's books? He likes to explore similar cause and effect, how things were changed topics. I love his ideas--however, I do find him a bit wordy and a little repetitive. Mostly though I think because he picks such broad topics so can't expand/be an expert in every society/animal species/behavior/etc. so tries to stick with like examples. Or maybe it's the complexity of his voice. I enjoy John Krakauer's work as well but also find it more difficult to get engaged with his writing--while still finding it engaging, if that makes sense? Probably doesn't...

Many of my peeves have been mentioned, but for sake of getting updates:

it’s really annoying when an author gets unreasonably attached to a cliché. Such as using "that was the $64,000 question" in pretty much every book she writes, often more than once (sometimes changing the value, sometimes not).

And I’ve lost track of the number of YA series I’ve stopped reading because the very intelligent heroine makes really stupid decisions or statements 90% of the time.

Can I add, I have a pet peeve around hair. Some authors seem to love their characters to have really long hair, and yet have no idea how much work it is to keep tidy or how to manage it realistically. I like having longer hair but it is more work, it does take longer to dry and it is more difficult to manage.

I was reading one of Mercedes Lackey's less good books and got fed up of the number of men with immaculately kept waist length silver hair and the lengthy descriptions of the things they braided into it. Not everyone needs to want hair down to their rear and it was just infuriating to read. The Anita Blake books are quite annoying for this too as all the men appear to have excessively long and well groomed hair.

I also hate it when authors get things wrong that indicate a complete lack of research. I read the first of the "Left Behind" books which had a chapter set in London. This indicated that the authors had done no research on British police behaviour, rank structures and organisations (we don't have captains, nor do the police drive sedan cars), language and speech patterns (people working at banks in Canary Wharf are unlikely to call someone Governor) or the way pubs operate. I know it's not a major objective of the book to paint an accurate description of London life, but it completely threw me out of the story to see such glaring errors in it which could have been corrected fairly easily.

Logged

And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once.

Can I add, I have a pet peeve around hair. Some authors seem to love their characters to have really long hair, and yet have no idea how much work it is to keep tidy or how to manage it realistically. I like having longer hair but it is more work, it does take longer to dry and it is more difficult to manage.

I was reading one of Mercedes Lackey's less good books and got fed up of the number of men with immaculately kept waist length silver hair and the lengthy descriptions of the things they braided into it. Not everyone needs to want hair down to their rear and it was just infuriating to read. The Anita Blake books are quite annoying for this too as all the men appear to have excessively long and well groomed hair.

My long hair is easy, but I don't try to do anything fancy with it, either. But have you noticed that none of those men have curly, tangle-prone hair?

Elves, of course, are an exception. They have perfect hair. It's just part of being an elf.

Oh gods, the hair thing drives me mad. Especially seeing, in lit and film, people waking up and having the brush just naturally glide through their long, thick, wavy hair. I have that sort, the very act of getting up in the morning knots it!

Logged

"Heh. Forgive our manners, little creature — that we may well kill and eat you is no excuse for rudeness."

Oh gods, the hair thing drives me mad. Especially seeing, in lit and film, people waking up and having the brush just naturally glide through their long, thick, wavy hair. I have that sort, the very act of getting up in the morning knots it!

Well, I have the long, thick, wavy hair that just lets the brush glide through in the morning. But if I cut it short, I look like a cross between a dandelion and a poodle and it takes three times as long to comb and style. So I believe in some people having thick, wavy hair that has to be long for them to do anything with it, but I agree that it gets annoying when they never have the slightest problem with their coiffure. Everyone's hair has some sort of problem attached to it, unless you have magic hair powers.

I was reading one of Mercedes Lackey's less good books and got fed up of the number of men with immaculately kept waist length silver hair and the lengthy descriptions of the things they braided into it. Not everyone needs to want hair down to their rear and it was just infuriating to read. The Anita Blake books are quite annoying for this too as all the men appear to have excessively long and well groomed hair.

But they had the hertasi, and I remember several instances of them doing hair. And I wish they lived in my neighborhood, with the tailoring and the hair...

I was reading one of Mercedes Lackey's less good books and got fed up of the number of men with immaculately kept waist length silver hair and the lengthy descriptions of the things they braided into it. Not everyone needs to want hair down to their rear and it was just infuriating to read. The Anita Blake books are quite annoying for this too as all the men appear to have excessively long and well groomed hair.

But they had the hertasi, and I remember several instances of them doing hair. And I wish they lived in my neighborhood, with the tailoring and the hair...

Not to mention most of the ones who had the longest and most elaborate dos were usually mages. I wouldn't put it past some of them to use magic to keep their hair perfect.

But I agree, it was more than a bit excessive. I have long hair, but it's not thick or wavy, and if I'm not careful, it tends to frizz and fluff on humid days. And it's slick, so when I do try to do anything more than just a simple braid or pony tail, everything just slides right out.

I recently read a pretty good book that nonetheless kind of peeved me by the end. It's called Napoleon's Buttons and it's non-fiction, a blend of science and history--how history has been shaped by chemistry, like the search for certain spices opening up world exploration, how plastics changed the economy, etc.. I like that sort of thing, and it's really pretty good. The conceit of the title is the idea that the tin buttons of Napoleon's soldiers' uniforms might have crumbled away in the cold Russian winter, contributing to the massive failure of that invasion. They mention this in the introduction--with lots of qualifiers and maybes and perhapses--and then they never talk about it again!

So basically, the book called Napoleon's Buttons has very little to do with Napoleon or buttons. It just irritated me because they didn't have to pick that as a title, they could have chosen a lot of other things and I would have been perfectly happy with the book. But I kept waiting for the chapter on Napoleon and the buttons, and it never came. It's like those older, small movies that release new DVD covers with a big star's face on them, even though the star was little-known when they did the movie and only appears in it for two minutes.

That's how I feel about the English title to the first Stieg Larsson book. The literal translation of the original Swedish title is "Men Who Hate Women". I mean, yes, Lisbeth Salander has a dragon tattoo, but it's mentioned once, maybe twice in the entire book? Also, while she may be the main character of the later books, she really isn't in the first one.

I've had more than one English-speaking reader complain that the book was very different from what they had expected. Based solely on the title, I can't say I blame them.

Many of my peeves have been mentioned, but for sake of getting updates:

it’s really annoying when an author gets unreasonably attached to a cliché. Such as using "that was the $64,000 question" in pretty much every book she writes, often more than once (sometimes changing the value, sometimes not).

George R R Martin...sigh. The first book of GoT I read, I thought it was great. Ditto the second. Third...well, maybe the payoff will be great. Even The Two Towers falls short of FOTR and ROTK, in many reader's estimation. Hated the 4th book so much I've never even bothered to buy vol 5.

Lots of reasons why I came to hate that set( mainly to do with the plot itself), but one was his propensity for falling in love with one word and running it into the ground. While writing volume 4, he discovered the word "jape", and promptly put it in every chapter. It's never varied with jest or joke...Everything is a "jape".

The other word he fell in love with while writing that book is "tummy". I HATE that word anyway, but it was especially jarring having the people in this (apparent) time period using this modern baby-talk word.

Many of my peeves have been mentioned, but for sake of getting updates:

it’s really annoying when an author gets unreasonably attached to a cliché. Such as using "that was the $64,000 question" in pretty much every book she writes, often more than once (sometimes changing the value, sometimes not).

George R R Martin...sigh. The first book of GoT I read, I thought it was great. Ditto the second. Third...well, maybe the payoff will be great. Even The Two Towers falls short of FOTR and ROTK, in many reader's estimation. Hated the 4th book so much I've never even bothered to buy vol 5.

Lots of reasons why I came to hate that set( mainly to do with the plot itself), but one was his propensity for falling in love with one word and running it into the ground. While writing volume 4, he discovered the word "jape", and promptly put it in every chapter. It's never varied with jest or joke...Everything is a "jape".

The other word he fell in love with while writing that book is "tummy". I HATE that word anyway, but it was especially jarring having the people in this (apparent) time period using this modern baby-talk word.

Yeah, I wanted to throw book four against the wall, but I'm glad I stuck with it. I really wish that he would have stated up front that 4 and 5 are congruent to a point. I kept wondering where the heck certain characters were.

I didn't have such a problem with tummy, since it was a young girl who was saying it, but it did seem odd. Overall, I like the books, I just wish he had put the info in the introduction that 4 and 5 were covering the same time, with different characters.

Many of my peeves have been mentioned, but for sake of getting updates:

it’s really annoying when an author gets unreasonably attached to a cliché. Such as using "that was the $64,000 question" in pretty much every book she writes, often more than once (sometimes changing the value, sometimes not).

George R R Martin...sigh. The first book of GoT I read, I thought it was great. Ditto the second. Third...well, maybe the payoff will be great. Even The Two Towers falls short of FOTR and ROTK, in many reader's estimation. Hated the 4th book so much I've never even bothered to buy vol 5.

Lots of reasons why I came to hate that set( mainly to do with the plot itself), but one was his propensity for falling in love with one word and running it into the ground. While writing volume 4, he discovered the word "jape", and promptly put it in every chapter. It's never varied with jest or joke...Everything is a "jape".

The other word he fell in love with while writing that book is "tummy". I HATE that word anyway, but it was especially jarring having the people in this (apparent) time period using this modern baby-talk word.

Yeah, I wanted to throw book four against the wall, but I'm glad I stuck with it. I really wish that he would have stated up front that 4 and 5 are congruent to a point. I kept wondering where the heck certain characters were.

I didn't have such a problem with tummy, since it was a young girl who was saying it, but it did seem odd. Overall, I like the books, I just wish he had put the info in the introduction that 4 and 5 were covering the same time, with different characters.

Mine had that warning and a discussion about why he did it that way; I read my on my Kindle.

Another small pet peeve: when a series is written by multiple authors (or in some cases pen names) and it’s not made clear on any pages of the book that you have that such is true.

Or when a book is part of a series, but it doesn’t make it very clear that it actually is part of a series, or which book of the series it is. I know that some authors try to claim that you can read their series in any order, but I like reading them in chronological order (or the canonical order, or publishing order, whatever)—particularly if I plan on reading the whole series!

Many of my peeves have been mentioned, but for sake of getting updates:

it’s really annoying when an author gets unreasonably attached to a cliché. Such as using "that was the $64,000 question" in pretty much every book she writes, often more than once (sometimes changing the value, sometimes not).

George R R Martin...sigh. The first book of GoT I read, I thought it was great. Ditto the second. Third...well, maybe the payoff will be great. Even The Two Towers falls short of FOTR and ROTK, in many reader's estimation. Hated the 4th book so much I've never even bothered to buy vol 5.

Lots of reasons why I came to hate that set( mainly to do with the plot itself), but one was his propensity for falling in love with one word and running it into the ground. While writing volume 4, he discovered the word "jape", and promptly put it in every chapter. It's never varied with jest or joke...Everything is a "jape".

The other word he fell in love with while writing that book is "tummy". I HATE that word anyway, but it was especially jarring having the people in this (apparent) time period using this modern baby-talk word.

Yeah, I wanted to throw book four against the wall, but I'm glad I stuck with it. I really wish that he would have stated up front that 4 and 5 are congruent to a point. I kept wondering where the heck certain characters were.

I didn't have such a problem with tummy, since it was a young girl who was saying it, but it did seem odd. Overall, I like the books, I just wish he had put the info in the introduction that 4 and 5 were covering the same time, with different characters.

Mine had that warning and a discussion about why he did it that way; I read my on my Kindle.

The paperback had it at the end, which nearly caused that book to go flying, LOL.